Melaca strait China's vulnerability? Is it true or Myth?

[Michael]

I suppose China will try to keep the friction below a certain threshold, and use the experience for training, but when the Philippines and the US will be looking for a casus belli, any one of these incidents could be blown out of proportion to justify a blockade. A modern day Gulf of Tonkin incident.

China and the U.S., don't want a really big war with each other. The decision makers on both sides are well aware of the consequences of such a war. It's just that, due to information asymmetry, it's easy to miscalculate: I don't want to hit you, but I think you want to hit me ......

As two major powers, the current official language is “military competition”. This means that neither side wants a direct war, but there will be some “friction” or an arms race in the military field, as well as proxy wars. Currently both sides have been setting up theater level commander hotlines (PLA Southern Theater Commander and US Indo-Pacific HQ Commander) in order to prevent overstepping the boundaries in these “military rivalries” and escalating to war.

 

[j_hungary]

For these analyses of yours, we disagree on too many details:
1. we think that it is true that the US and NATO countries did not have full inputs in the Russo-Ukrainian war. But it's not that you think those inputs didn't have much effect on them. Either way, these huge supplies were indeed consumed on the battlefield. This is real attrition. Even if some of their aid was a transactional act, it would require the war to end in the way it was intended in order to reap the rewards. The weapons provided by some European countries have seriously compromised their own security and defense. They do not have a larger defense budget to supplement these armaments.
2, The economic situation of the United States and European countries is not good. There are some European countries that are not aligned with the United States on the issue of trade with China. More some European countries choose to trade with China under the table. If you go through Chinese social media, you will find a lot of evidence of private trade. These are not small numbers of trade. This includes the United States as well. It's just that, whereas before these trades were more in the news, now they are taking place under the table.
3, The U.S. does have some influence over the oil economy, but the oil economy is not entirely under U.S. control these days. Many countries have begun to use local currency settlements or settlement systems other than the U.S. dollar in their oil trade. If the United States were to forcefully manipulate the price of oil, it would only make these non-dollar transactions more widespread and further reduce the international status of the dollar. At the same time, due to the rise of new energy sources, the influence of oil on national energy sources is gradually diminishing.
4, the United States did once have a huge military-industrial system. The equipment and factories it now sequesters are still a huge number. For example, Boeing and General Motors are in decline, but when the country needs them, they can convert civilian production lines into weapons production lines in a very short time. But many more factories can no longer be converted to military production lines, and they have a severe shortage of workers to operate those machines. The current prevalence of the virtual economy and the decline of the real economy in the United States has not been transformed. When a crisis comes, huge amounts of wealth cannot be converted into physical goods; they are waste paper and numbers.
5, Russia does suffer some repercussions because of the Russia-Ukraine war. But at present these effects are still in a manageable range. In the past, Russia has been focusing on the European direction, and its relationship with China is not as close as it appears on international diplomatic occasions. Russia is now taking the Far East as the center of gravity for its future development, which is the only way to show that it really wants to have a close relationship with China. The conflict between China and Russia is so long ago that it is hard for them to really let go of their past hatred. The US has helped China and Russia to let go of their hatred. If it wasn't for some moves by the US, Russia wouldn't have taken the initiative to move closer to China. Russia has a lot of resources and China has money technology and talents. This is standard cooperative behavior, not helping behavior.

1.) Why? again, we aren't talking about the number into trillions, US defence budget a year is between 800 to 900 billons, the war in itself is between 40-60 billion a year. that's less than 10% of the deviation of the defence budget.

Why exactly the war needs to end in favourable term for the US to benefit? Beside, you aren't arguing whether this war can make US benefit from it, you are arguing this war will burden the US and deplete it power. I simply can't see how if we are talking about 40-60 billions dollar war can crumble the US?

2.) Huh, you are basing this on unsubstantiable trade between EU and China? First of all, you can't even prove positively this term existed, second, even if this existed, it would not be a large amount since you can't deal that much trade with China "under the table" without any of the government know. And finally, I can't even see how this mean EU economy outlook is not good if you are talking about "Large Volume" of under the table trade, or why you need to trade with China under the table, as China is not sanctioned by the EU or US.......

3.)I am not talking about currency, I am talking about flooding the market with oil with US and Canada produce more, oil price is going to drop, regardless of currency status if we have over supply in the market. When it drops down to a level, then it would not be profitable for Russia to even pump it, let alone sell it.

4.) lol, all I can say is you should read up Defense Production Act 1950 and how many times it has been activated and what it encompasses

Defense Production Act (DPA): What It Is, How It Works, and Role During COVID-19

The Defense Production Act (DPA) gives the president the power to order the production and supply of goods and services to support national defense.

www.investopedia.com

5.) This have nothing to do with the US or EU.......

 

[Michael]

1.) Why? again, we aren't talking about the number into trillions, US defence budget a year is between 800 to 900 billons, the war in itself is between 40-60 billion a year. that's less than 10% of the deviation of the defence budget.

No one thinks this war, which spends 10% of the defense budget, will destroy the United States. That's where your understanding is skewed.

My point is this:
There is an economic war, a technological war, and a military competition going on between the US and China.
The Russo-Ukrainian and the Israeli-Palestinian war, as well as other war factors, will affect and interfere with the development of the US. As to the extent of these impacts, there is some difference of opinion between us. But we all agree that these effects are unlikely to destroy the United States. That is the consensus.
Contrast this with the fact that China is not involved in any wars and is currently developing at full capacity.
This is the one that is the central point.

2.) Huh, you are basing this on unsubstantiable trade between EU and China? First of all, you can't even prove positively this term existed, second, even if this existed, it would not be a large amount since you can't deal that much trade with China "under the table" without any of the government know. And finally, I can't even see how this mean EU economy outlook is not good if you are talking about "Large Volume" of under the table trade, or why you need to trade with China under the table, as China is not sanctioned by the EU or US.......

China trades with many countries under the table. This is very common and well-informed in the Chinese media. I don't know how the English media reports and views these things. I basically can't find this type of news in some of the major international English-language media.
These deals are not low dollar amounts, and they could not have happened without the governments' consent. The government acquiesces to these deals. (During the time that the US government was sanctioning DJI, many US government agencies were still buying and using DJI products in large quantities. There are many such examples)
Politics, diplomacy, military, economics, and treating these behaviors differently is a very common phenomenon in the current international environment. It's no secret.

4.) lol, all I can say is you should read up Defense Production Act 1950 and how many times it has been activated and what it encompasses

It's one thing to have the law and the need and the will, it's another to have the ability to do it.
I'm not ignorant enough to not know that the US has this law at that level.
My point: things are a little tough in the US at the moment, and it can be done in a pinch. But if this trend continues, it will be hard to do in the future.

=============================================
3、As I've said in my previous arguments, I don't think the US has that capability. Suppressing the price of oil by extracting it on a large scale and putting it on the market would itself be a huge loss. It would be a protracted war of attrition, and in the US's current situation, it can't afford such losses.
Meanwhile, many countries have now begun to change their trading patterns with each other. These changes in trading patterns are due in large part to the desire to get rid of the control of the United States.
At the same time, with the rise of new energy sources, the influence of oil has become far less influential than before.

 

[j_hungary]

No one thinks this war, which spends 10% of the defense budget, will destroy the United States. That's where your understanding is skewed.

My point is this:
There is an economic war, a technological war, and a military competition going on between the US and China.
The Russo-Ukrainian and the Israeli-Palestinian war, as well as other war factors, will affect and interfere with the development of the US. As to the extent of these impacts, there is some difference of opinion between us. But we all agree that these effects are unlikely to destroy the United States. That is the consensus.
Contrast this with the fact that China is not involved in any wars and is currently developing at full capacity.
This is the one that is the central point.

Again, you are talking about sub 100 billion expenditure. This may be a lot of money for candy, it's a drop in the bucket for a 30 trillion economy....

Whether or not being in a war (which the US didn't) would hamper economic and technological effort remained to be seen, but you should know there is a giant leap of technological advancement during WW2.

China trades with many countries under the table. This is very common and well-informed in the Chinese media. I don't know how the English media reports and views these things. I basically can't find this type of news in some of the major international English-language media.
These deals are not low dollar amounts, and they could not have happened without the governments' consent. The government acquiesces to these deals. (During the time that the US government was sanctioning DJI, many US government agencies were still buying and using DJI products in large quantities. There are many such examples)
Politics, diplomacy, military, economics, and treating these behaviors differently is a very common phenomenon in the current international environment. It's no secret.

You can't trade under the table in a large scale, I don't know how you think this will work in China, but in the West, this is tax evasion and tax fraud, you are talking about serious jail time. Also, under the table deal always cash deal, which mean the number is going to be limited.

What you are talking about is private deal, individual government employee is using DJI drone for example, it was not banned (Not yet, unless the CCP Drone act passed the house later this year) individual employee can still get DJI drone, but no governmental contract to be allowed since NDAA 2024. And if the CCP Drone act passed through, that is a complete ban of all Chinese drone because the FCC will stop registering Chinese drone altogether.

It's one thing to have the law and the need and the will, it's another to have the ability to do it.
I'm not ignorant enough to not know that the US has this law at that level.
My point: things are a little tough in the US at the moment, and it can be done in a pinch. But if this trend continues, it will be hard to do in the future.

So you think buying Chinese drone = time is tough in the US??

This is about spending pattern, I made over $90k a year (roughly 450,000 Yuan) and I only buy chocolate when they are doing $2 discount......

=============================================
3、As I've said in my previous arguments, I don't think the US has that capability. Suppressing the price of oil by extracting it on a large scale and putting it on the market would itself be a huge loss. It would be a protracted war of attrition, and in the US's current situation, it can't afford such losses.
Meanwhile, many countries have now begun to change their trading patterns with each other. These changes in trading patterns are due in large part to the desire to get rid of the control of the United States.
At the same time, with the rise of new energy sources, the influence of oil has become far less influential than before.

You think US cannot produce 20 million barrel of oil a day when they are doing 19.3 million barrels now? This is not about whether or not they are willing to do, but about what they need to do if they wanted to F over Russia, and that is the most express things to do.

On the other hand, you can change the trading pattern, but unless you can get rid of the current currency reserve system, you can't get rid of the control of the United States, because either you come up with your own currency (in trillion no less) and use them to pay internationally and seriously inflate your currency value, you need to use USD to act as an intermediatory, so to give you time to move your money around, so you don't need to hard print it.

Global Trade on USD is worth around 8 trillion a day, even if you want to hold off settlement for 3 days, you will need to come up with a portion of 24 trillion extra (what is China shares of world trade? 40% or so?) of your own currency, sure, that sounded like a plan.........

It's NEVER the petroldollar or whatever dollar is the issue, the issue for most country in tjhe world is they need to either use the USD or come up with their own money to put in international circulation, that's how US control world trade, by controlling the currency being used in world trade.

 

[Michael]

Again, you are talking about sub 100 billion expenditure. This may be a lot of money for candy, it's a drop in the bucket for a 30 trillion economy....
Whether or not being in a war (which the US didn't) would hamper economic and technological effort remained to be seen, but you should know there is a giant leap of technological advancement during WW2.

The United States of America during World War II is fundamentally different from the United States of America today. During World War II, the United States had the most powerful manufacturing industries in the world, and now those industries have left the United States for China. As to whether the United States can let these manufacturing industries return, depends on the game between China and the United States.
Before the return of the real economy, 30 trillion dollars is just a figure. According to public information, in the first half of 2024, China's GDP is 61% of the U.S. GDP. However, what you can buy in China by spending 61 dollars, you can't buy in the US for 100 dollars.

You can't trade under the table in a large scale, I don't know how you think this will work in China, but in the West, this is tax evasion and tax fraud, you are talking about serious jail time. Also, under the table deal always cash deal, which mean the number is going to be limited.

What you are talking about is private deal, individual government employee is using DJI drone for example, it was not banned (Not yet, unless the CCP Drone act passed the house later this year) individual employee can still get DJI drone, but no governmental contract to be allowed since NDAA 2024. And if the CCP Drone act passed through, that is a complete ban of all Chinese drone because the FCC will stop registering Chinese drone altogether.
So you think buying Chinese drone = time is tough in the US??

The amounts of these transactions are not small figures, and it is also certain that the government is aware of the existence of these transactions, and that certain transactions are still directly involved by the government. As to whether your government or the relevant agencies publicize them, I am not sure. But this information, in the Chinese media, is always there. Companies involved in these deals also publicize the information in the Chinese media. As for the so-called regulation, you can ask the U.S. government and the relevant regulatory agencies.

Regarding DJI: The U.S. has withdrawn its ban on DJI. If the U.S. could easily solve the Chinese drone problem, it would not have withdrawn the ban. It needs to consider the cost of continuing to ban DJI. After the U.S. withdrew the DJI ban, the Chinese government announced a drone export restriction order that took effect on the same day as the withdrawal of the DJI ban.

You think US cannot produce 20 million barrel of oil a day when they are doing 19.3 million barrels now? This is not about whether or not they are willing to do, but about what they need to do if they wanted to F over Russia, and that is the most express things to do.

On the other hand, you can change the trading pattern, but unless you can get rid of the current currency reserve system, you can't get rid of the control of the United States, because either you come up with your own currency (in trillion no less) and use them to pay internationally and seriously inflate your currency value, you need to use USD to act as an intermediatory, so to give you time to move your money around, so you don't need to hard print it.

Global Trade on USD is worth around 8 trillion a day, even if you want to hold off settlement for 3 days, you will need to come up with a portion of 24 trillion extra (what is China shares of world trade? 40% or so?) of your own currency, sure, that sounded like a plan.........

It's NEVER the petroldollar or whatever dollar is the issue, the issue for most country in tjhe world is they need to either use the USD or come up with their own money to put in international circulation, that's how US control world trade, by controlling the currency being used in world trade.

The problem with the dollar and oil.
The U.S. really can't do it now. By “can't do it”, I mean that it would be too costly to do so in a peaceful and competitive environment. From the standpoint of the Chinese, I very much hope that the United States will do so.
The U.S. can create some volatility in the oil market, but it no longer has full control. If it uses more forceful means to control the oil market, it will only make more countries join the “anti-American camp”. Its productivity no longer allows it to carry out such a large-scale production operation.
As for the dollar. At present, the countries in the so-called “anti-American camp” are basically out of control of the dollar. If the United States is willing to use its national credit to wage a war on the dollar, China will be more than happy to accept the challenge.

 

[j_hungary]

The United States of America during World War II is fundamentally different from the United States of America today. During World War II, the United States had the most powerful manufacturing industries in the world, and now those industries have left the United States for China. As to whether the United States can let these manufacturing industries return, depends on the game between China and the United States.
Before the return of the real economy, 30 trillion dollars is just a figure. According to public information, in the first half of 2024, China's GDP is 61% of the U.S. GDP. However, what you can buy in China by spending 61 dollars, you can't buy in the US for 100 dollars.

Again, the baseline is preserved for the US as per Defense Production Acts. Not all of them gone to China........

And purchasing power is not a good indicator as to how much things you can get, because you spend locally, so 1 Yuan is always 1 Yuan and 1 USD is always 1 USD, I mean, you don't spend USD in China and you don't spend Yuan in the US.

The amounts of these transactions are not small figures, and it is also certain that the government is aware of the existence of these transactions, and that certain transactions are still directly involved by the government. As to whether your government or the relevant agencies publicize them, I am not sure. But this information, in the Chinese media, is always there. Companies involved in these deals also publicize the information in the Chinese media. As for the so-called regulation, you can ask the U.S. government and the relevant regulatory agencies.

Again, it may be into billions, but that amount cannot be that big, because you are talking about committing tax fraud if this is a big amount under the table,

And you have to pay cash if you want to deal under the table, which limit the amount of money you can spend.

On the other hand, none of what you said here can be verify, so I will just leave it at that.

Regarding DJI: The U.S. has withdrawn its ban on DJI. If the U.S. could easily solve the Chinese drone problem, it would not have withdrawn the ban. It needs to consider the cost of continuing to ban DJI. After the U.S. withdrew the DJI ban, the Chinese government announced a drone export restriction order that took effect on the same day as the withdrawal of the DJI ban.

It was never withdrawn, it was never banned, the only limitation BEFORE the CCP Drone act is the governmental use of such drone because it gives away sensitive information.

CCP drone act, if passed, WILL ban DJI drone the law as explained by the congress bill

The problem with the dollar and oil.
The U.S. really can't do it now. By “can't do it”, I mean that it would be too costly to do so in a peaceful and competitive environment. From the standpoint of the Chinese, I very much hope that the United States will do so.
The U.S. can create some volatility in the oil market, but it no longer has full control. If it uses more forceful means to control the oil market, it will only make more countries join the “anti-American camp”. Its productivity no longer allows it to carry out such a large-scale production operation.
As for the dollar. At present, the countries in the so-called “anti-American camp” are basically out of control of the dollar. If the United States is willing to use its national credit to wage a war on the dollar, China will be more than happy to accept the challenge.

huh? You do know US is the world number 1 producer of oil, right? And Canada is number 3.

US do have full control in oil market, both by the way of production and by the way of currency settlement.

And lol, you can try, but do you realise what you said here? If US start weaponize dollar, you are looking at complete collapse of world trade, because either you are talking about a limitation of US Dollar to be used in world trade, or currency sanction (along the same line the US did to Russia) on targeted country. Currently there are only 1 currency that can potentially replace the USD if push comes to shove, and that's Euro, and you can probably bet every RMB you have they are not going to do it, which mean either you need to expand Chinese currency in multiple fold to cover the Interational trade if this is the first one, or you need to expand Chinese currency in multiple fold to act as forex and currency reserve if this is the second, both scenario is not going to be good for China.........

 

[Michael]

Again, the baseline is preserved for the US as per Defense Production Acts. Not all of them gone to China........

And purchasing power is not a good indicator as to how much things you can get, because you spend locally, so 1 Yuan is always 1 Yuan and 1 USD is always 1 USD, I mean, you don't spend USD in China and you don't spend Yuan in the US.



Again, it may be into billions, but that amount cannot be that big, because you are talking about committing tax fraud if this is a big amount under the table,

And you have to pay cash if you want to deal under the table, which limit the amount of money you can spend.

On the other hand, none of what you said here can be verify, so I will just leave it at that.



It was never withdrawn, it was never banned, the only limitation BEFORE the CCP Drone act is the governmental use of such drone because it gives away sensitive information.

CCP drone act, if passed, WILL ban DJI drone the law as explained by the congress bill

View attachment 64194


huh? You do know US is the world number 1 producer of oil, right? And Canada is number 3.

US do have full control in oil market, both by the way of production and by the way of currency settlement.

And lol, you can try, but do you realise what you said here? If US start weaponize dollar, you are looking at complete collapse of world trade, because either you are talking about a limitation of US Dollar to be used in world trade, or currency sanction (along the same line the US did to Russia) on targeted country. Currently there are only 1 currency that can potentially replace the USD if push comes to shove, and that's Euro, and you can probably bet every RMB you have they are not going to do it, which mean either you need to expand Chinese currency in multiple fold to cover the Interational trade if this is the first one, or you need to expand Chinese currency in multiple fold to act as forex and currency reserve if this is the second, both scenario is not going to be good for China.........

Well. Let's wait and see.

 

[Hendarto]

Training hard

https://twitter.com/x/status/1833507186250813540

 

[FuturePAF]

China and the U.S., don't want a really big war with each other. The decision makers on both sides are well aware of the consequences of such a war. It's just that, due to information asymmetry, it's easy to miscalculate: I don't want to hit you, but I think you want to hit me ......

As two major powers, the current official language is “military competition”. This means that neither side wants a direct war, but there will be some “friction” or an arms race in the military field, as well as proxy wars. Currently both sides have been setting up theater level commander hotlines (PLA Southern Theater Commander and US Indo-Pacific HQ Commander) in order to prevent overstepping the boundaries in these “military rivalries” and escalating to war.

Precisely, the fact that much isn’t being spend to actually build up to contain China, means that both sides are posturing. The intention is to contain the status quo.

 

[Hendarto]

Now did someone say "China does not have enough nuclear submarines"
That may have been true in the past. The bottleneck is facilities to fabricate those submarine is limited to primitive single shack facility. But in the last 5 years, China has built ultra-modern factories to build nuclear submarines on reclaimed land in Huludao. Before the building spree started China's 93, 93A submarine inventory was around 6. They were used to upgrade the sub with each iteration. Add to that the recent addition of 6. Total is 12

https://twitter.com/x/status/1832901403326701836

https://twitter.com/x/status/1832901406208270680

NEW FACTORY

 

[Hendarto]

Here is the article on new facility
China, is the country’s only shipyard engaged in the construction of nuclear submarines. The yard has expanded since its inception and is poised to grow further in the coming years. With some of the new facilities having already been commissioned, there has been a considerable increase in the throughput of the yard. This report examines the augmentation of facilities at the Bohai shipyard and makes an assessment on the new build rate of nuclear submarines. It finds that China appears to have completed the iterative process of spiral development and has now moved to the phase of rapid serial construction.

The Nuclear Submarine Building Capacity of China’s Bohai Shipyard

The Bohai Shipyard in Huludao, part of China's CSSC, plays a key role in nuclear submarine construction, featuring advanced facilities like drydocks, pontoon launch systems, and modular shipbuilding methods.

www.orfonline.org

 

[lightning f57]

You think US cannot produce 20 million barrel of oil a day when they are doing 19.3 million barrels now? This is not about whether or not they are willing to do, but about what they need to do if they wanted to F over Russia, and that is the most express things to do.

You think they will do that to p155 off the middle eastern countries? Opec will cut production and offset any increase the US and Canada do to try and maintain the price.

The US does not control the world oil markets, Opec does. That is why they have stationed so many military bases in the middle east, its all about trying to influence the flow of oil.

The US has a deficit every year as they are consuming more than they are producing, both Canada and US combined yearly have nearly a 2bn barrels of oil deficit a year. Opec on the other hand has a 7 billion barrels of oil surplus every year which they can sell off.

 

[j_hungary]

You think they will do that to p155 off the middle eastern countries? Opec will cut production and offset any increase the US and Canada do to try and maintain the price.

The US does not control the world oil markets, Opec does. That is why they have stationed so many military bases in the middle east, its all about trying to influence the flow of oil.

The US has a deficit every year as they are consuming more than they are producing, both Canada and US combined yearly have nearly a 2bn barrels of oil deficit a year. Opec on the other hand has a 7 billion barrels of oil surplus every year which they can sell off.

Well, if we were in early 2000, I will agree with you. But then look at how much oil OPEC produce now (well, last year figure)?

List of countries by oil production 2023 - Country Cassette

List of countries by oil production 2023: United States 11,184,870 bbl, Russia 10,111,830 bbl, Saudi Arabia (OPEC) 9,313,145 bbl, Canada 4,459,455 bbl, Iraq (OPEC) 4,084,822 bbl, China 3,987,677 bbl, United Arab Emirates (OPEC) 3,091,481 bbl, Brazil 2,905,121 bbl, Iran 2,546,336 bbl, Kuwait...

countrycassette.com

OPEC only account for probably 1/3 off the top 10 (give or take, do the math yourself), and the 3 main player are US, Russia and Saudi.

Russia is not going to lower the production, that mean money for them, and that's the whole point, Saudi can probably squeeze 1 million barrel but that's it, any less it will take a big hit on their revenue, and US can Canada alone can offset almost anything Saudi cut, bear in mind US and Canada can produce up to 20 million barrel a day at the maximum, if they want to. If the US and Canada expand to that level, you are talking about roughly 10 million barrels COMBINED for all OPEC country, that's not enough for them to even drill them.

So, no, if US and Canada were to increase their oil production, OPEC can't match, they cannot cut a lot, otherwise it will hurt their revenue.

And selling surplus does not work that way, it kept the price low, because you are dumping strategic reserve. If you cut oil production and then selling surplus, the 2 actions negate each other

 

[FHN]

Again, you are talking about sub 100 billion expenditure. This may be a lot of money for candy, it's a drop in the bucket for a 30 trillion economy....

Whether or not being in a war (which the US didn't) would hamper economic and technological effort remained to be seen, but you should know there is a giant leap of technological advancement during WW2.



You can't trade under the table in a large scale, I don't know how you think this will work in China, but in the West, this is tax evasion and tax fraud, you are talking about serious jail time. Also, under the table deal always cash deal, which mean the number is going to be limited.

What you are talking about is private deal, individual government employee is using DJI drone for example, it was not banned (Not yet, unless the CCP Drone act passed the house later this year) individual employee can still get DJI drone, but no governmental contract to be allowed since NDAA 2024. And if the CCP Drone act passed through, that is a complete ban of all Chinese drone because the FCC will stop registering Chinese drone altogether.




So you think buying Chinese drone = time is tough in the US??

This is about spending pattern, I made over $90k a year (roughly 450,000 Yuan) and I only buy chocolate when they are doing $2 discount......

You think US cannot produce 20 million barrel of oil a day when they are doing 19.3 million barrels now? This is not about whether or not they are willing to do, but about what they need to do if they wanted to F over Russia, and that is the most express things to do.

On the other hand, you can change the trading pattern, but unless you can get rid of the current currency reserve system, you can't get rid of the control of the United States, because either you come up with your own currency (in trillion no less) and use them to pay internationally and seriously inflate your currency value, you need to use USD to act as an intermediatory, so to give you time to move your money around, so you don't need to hard print it.

Global Trade on USD is worth around 8 trillion a day, even if you want to hold off settlement for 3 days, you will need to come up with a portion of 24 trillion extra (what is China shares of world trade? 40% or so?) of your own currency, sure, that sounded like a plan.........

It's NEVER the petroldollar or whatever dollar is the issue, the issue for most country in tjhe world is they need to either use the USD or come up with their own money to put in international circulation, that's how US control world trade, by controlling the currency being used in world trade.

Congress has passed five bills appropriating $175 billion in response to Russia’s February 2022 invasion of Ukraine

How Much U.S. Aid Is Going to Ukraine?

Nine charts illustrate the extraordinary level of support the United States has provided Ukraine in its war against Russian invaders.

www.cfr.org

Ukraine has received upward to 300 billion+ in economic and military aid from the EU countries and United States and still not able to push Russia out of Ukraine. Even the old junk f-16 was considered game changer and no longer talk about after one top Ukrainian pilot killed trying to shoot down a drone lol

 

[FHN]

Well, if we were in early 2000, I will agree with you. But then look at how much oil OPEC produce now (well, last year figure)?

View attachment 64905

List of countries by oil production 2023 - Country Cassette

List of countries by oil production 2023: United States 11,184,870 bbl, Russia 10,111,830 bbl, Saudi Arabia (OPEC) 9,313,145 bbl, Canada 4,459,455 bbl, Iraq (OPEC) 4,084,822 bbl, China 3,987,677 bbl, United Arab Emirates (OPEC) 3,091,481 bbl, Brazil 2,905,121 bbl, Iran 2,546,336 bbl, Kuwait...

countrycassette.com

OPEC only account for probably 1/3 off the top 10 (give or take, do the math yourself), and the 3 main player are US, Russia and Saudi.

Russia is not going to lower the production, that mean money for them, and that's the whole point, Saudi can probably squeeze 1 million barrel but that's it, any less it will take a big hit on their revenue, and US can Canada alone can offset almost anything Saudi cut, bear in mind US and Canada can produce up to 20 million barrel a day at the maximum, if they want to. If the US and Canada expand to that level, you are talking about roughly 10 million barrels COMBINED for all OPEC country, that's not enough for them to even drill them.

So, no, if US and Canada were to increase their oil production, OPEC can't match, they cannot cut a lot, otherwise it will hurt their revenue.

And selling surplus does not work that way, it kept the price low, because you are dumping strategic reserve. If you cut oil production and then selling surplus, the 2 actions negate each other

The United States is going all in on oil production because they can no longer compete in green tech with china. They thought they could dominate solar,wind,electric vehicles industries. So much so for climate change BS the US been spewing the last decade. Don't hear much about it nowadays